Reconciliation: New Politics for Victims of Torture
By Dr Mohanlal Panda,
Secretary/Advisor, PVCHR
In
2003, after the release of the Abu Ghraib photos, a reporter asked a young
Iraqi man about the reasons for the rise in violence against U.S. soldiers. His
response emphasized the imperative for revenge:
It is a shame for foreigners to put a bag over
their heads, to make a man lie on the ground with your shoe on his neck . . .
This is a great shame for the whole tribe. It is the duty of that man, and of our
tribe, to get revenge on that soldier—to kill that man. Their duty is to attack
them, to wash the shame. The shame is a stain, a dirty thing—they have to wash
it. We cannot sleep until we have revenge. [1]
This
is not merely the isolated response of one man. Summarizing decades of research
on torture survivors, a leading scholar concluded that torture “. . . generates
intense hatred and desire for vengeance against the perpetrators, radicalizing
even ordinary people with no strong political views”.
[2] Several other researches indicate that torture generates a sense of
revenge and retaliation in the mind of person who has been subjected to severe
physical and prolong psychological torture.
It breaks the victim’s capacity to think rationally.
For
centuries torture has been used as an extreme form of violence, as an
instrument of power and subjugation across the world. Justification for its use
ranges from securing critical and lead information from an alleged perpetrator
in detention by breaking his spirit to the community punishment. Women are especially,
tortured to guarantee gender subservience. State and non state agencies follow
new techniques in using physical and psychological torture that leaves no
verifiable evidence during investigation.
The ‘culture of impunity’ challenges the fundamental belief that the
state is the guarantor of protection of rights of every citizen, thus making rule
of law and constitutional provisions the first causality in a democracy. The
social and institutional approval of torture is generating immense desire among
the perpetrator to commit crime which they find very hard to resist. Article 2
(2) of the UNCAT states that: “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether
a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other
public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture”. As one scholar
put it, “Even though torture is not, on balance, effective or rational, it
persists through its deep psychological appeal, to the powerful and the
powerless alike, in times of crisis”. [3] What we all see now that there is a collective
effort by the state, the policy makers, the prosecutors and the torture
approving citizens to provide a legal
cover to the acts of torture and sideline discussion whether torture is
legitimate or not.
Torture and its multiple effects
Hundreds of testimonies compiled by People’s
Vigilance Committee on Human Rights (PVCHR)* of the victims of police torture and torture
by the non state actors in connivance with the state apparatus indicate towards
physical harm and prevalence of extensive psychological trauma among the
victims. In some of these cases, children of the victim’s family became secondary
victims by virtue of being witness of the torture and its “tail end” effect.
The findings of the organization are indicative and not representative of the
available data. The victims often have to live through their humiliation without
being able to answer to the questions of their children, family and community.
Everyone around the victim grows up with a sense of destined victimhood rooted
in complete disempowerment of the self caused by the state and the society.
Majority of the victims in their testimonies, at the time of torture were
thinking about death rather than the cause and the person who inflicted it. Muslims live with constant fear of prosecution
in a post riot scenario, poor dalits always remain anxious about a knock at
their door to be picked up by the police to clean the toilets at the stations
or in the jail or accept the guilt for a crime which has not been committed by
them, tribals believe that they could be rounded up and beaten by the joint
forces of the state and non state actors for not vacating their lands. The
testimonies point towards extreme form of custodial torture. Although torture does not produce reliable information, it may
persist because it satisfies psychological needs in times of stress. Specifically,
it counters a sense of desperation, reassures interrogators that they are in
control, and bestows a feeling of empowerment, at least in the enclosed world
of the interrogation room. [4] According to an
empirical study by Leo civilian interrogations last, on average, about 2 hours. [5] However,
for proven false confessions, the average length of interrogation was 16.3
hours. [6]
There are also specific information in the testimonies where the
children were bitten up by the police and the local mafias for the alleged
crime committed by other male members of the family. Deliberate intimidation and physical harm to
the children to extract information about the family members are often done on
the basis of caste and economic capability of the family.
Some
of the other findings on violence against children are as follows:
·
The first visit by the police or the non state actors marks the beginning
of the trauma.
·
Fear leading to displacement, sometimes multiple displacement of the
family.
·
Breaking of the family for individual security leads to dependence of
relatives, often results in strained relation.
·
Children have to leave the school affecting their childhood development.
Leaving behind the normal social environment like playing with friends,
interactions with teachers, elders, community care are affected. Not many of
the displaced families succeed in providing their children with a welcoming
social environment.
·
In the absence of parental guidance children get into drugs, petty crime.
This puts additional stress on the parents.
·
Some of the children run away with a feeling of numbness when they see
any policeman or man in uniform.
·
Psychological distress affects the victim’s narrative in the form of
regular breakdown. However, as a departure, among the extreme poor community
the tendency to show solidarity with the victims is noticed including sharing
the responsibility of child care.
·
Grown up children from the marginalized community very quickly realize
that they and their family members have to live with the sufferings and it is a
part of their existence. They grow up accepting that their troubles are not
over but in fact, ongoing.
·
In any case, children remember the sufferings of their parents and
factors or persons that altered their life.
Research
that focuses directly on the psychological consequences of participating in
torture as a perpetrator is rare. Robert Jay Lifton interviewed Nazi doctors
who participated in human experimentation and killings, and found them to be
“normal professionals” who offered medical justifications for the killings. He
argued that while inside an “atrocity-producing” environment, a perpetrator of
torture can believe that his or her behavior is normal, even desirable,
behavior required or valued by peers and supervisors. It may be only later,
outside of that specific environment that the torturer may question his or her
behavior, and begin to experience psychological damage resulting from
involvement in torture and trauma. In these cases, the resulting psychological
symptoms are very similar to those of victims, including anxiety, intrusive
traumatic memories, and impaired cognitive and social functioning. [7] Interviews
with former torturers illustrate the heavy psychological toll that
participation in torture can have on perpetrators. [8]
Will there be an
end to torture India?
Resentment against the state’s relentless assaults on the rights
and freedom of the impoverished people has been manifested by the victims and
civil society groups mostly through non violent actions. On several occasions the
courts and human rights institutions have also documented culpability of the state.
Declining responsiveness of the justice delivery institutions and decreasing
faith by the majority of the population belonging to the marginalized groups heightens
the fear of state being perceived to be sliding into a dysfunctional state.
The discussions on protection of human rights in India
are rarely encouraged or generated in the society, primarily, (a) because as
per the illustration of Mahmood Mamdani - In a world in which cats are few and
rats are many, one way cats have stabilized their rule, according to Mamdani,
is by “tagging” rats with a discourse on issues of caste and religious identity
or capability. It is then quite possible
that in a world where rats have managed to triumph over cats in terms of
numbers, rats may continue living in a world defined by cats, that is, by identities
generated in the era when cats ruled; [9] (b) lack of
knowledge of human rights within Indian society in general and among bureaucracy
and political decision-makers in particular.
The failure of Indian parliament to legislate a
domestic law to prevent torture till today not only confirms the above suspicion
but also substantiates that ending torture against citizens of the country is
not part of serious political discourse. All of us see this happening every day,
feel the pain and agony but do not make it to say “Never again”.
We in PVCHR believe there are two ways to address the
issue of torture. One, by introducing a movement for Human Rights Education
(HRE), emphasizing on process of psycho-education based
on hope, honor and human dignity and the other, by
addressing at caste based discrimination through political reconciliation
across the country.
There
are evidences of social transformation HRE has brought across the world
including nations those have witnessed ethnic conflict. It has brought in
changes among the students, their
parents and teachers in believing that discrimination based on caste, religion
and gender are forms of torture. Thus, HRE can be an effective tool for
generational change, enforcement of law and political articulation. It helps in
deconstruction of power relation in every exploitative society. Therefore human rights education
has to give human rights back their moral, legal, political and social meaning.
De-politicising human rights makes them empty and vulnerable for politics of
interests and new apologetic ethics à la Ignatieff's "ethics of lesser
evil". [10]
In the last two decades India has witnessed judicial activism,
institutional interventions, civil society campaigns, victim’s resolve to
demand for justice and an untiring media taking up cases on behalf of victims
are the hopes on which democracy and constitution has survived. Working with
institutions and victims takes us to believe what Luc Huyse states, that there has been “a shift from the cult
of the hero to the cult of the victim. Suffering instead of heroism now
attracts public and political consideration”. He added that “victim empowerment
is not a blessing in all circumstances. It can become an obstacle to peaceful
coexistence and mutual trust.”[11] Identification of the victims needs protection
of law and community hand holding for a longtime, which Indian state does not
provide due to absence of a favorable political context to do this. Elimination of differences and politics of
recognition should be of great priority if a different political platform has
to be created for nation building. The prevailing animosity based on caste,
religion, local or immigrants need to be addressed through political
reconciliation, social accommodation and sharing of resources in an equitable
manner. Or else we all need to be ready for a scenario when Mahmood Mamdani asks, what happens when yesterday’s victims act out
of a determination that they must never again be victimized, never again?
[12]
Almost seven decades ago while fighting for India’s freedom Gandhiji was seeking political reconciliation between Indians and
Britishers, religious reconciliation between Hindus and Muslims and social
reconciliation between upper caste and dalits.
Post Independence we lost the plot and Indian state failed to decentralize
political discourse and reconciliation. For reconciliation to happen in the
family or the nation, responsibility may need to replace blame; a readiness to
understand may need to become more important than the longing to be understood.
We may fail, even as Gandhi failed with his son; but perhaps we should try,
even as Gandhi tried. [13]
*PVCHR works with
survivors of torture in several parts of India directly as well as through
local partners.
End Notes:
[1] Danner, M., Torture and truth: America,
Abu Ghraib, and the war on terror. New York, March 4, 2005, Page 12.
[2] Basoglu, M., A multivariate contextual
analysis of torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatments: Implications
for an evidence-based definition of torture. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 79, 2009, Page 142.
[3] McCoy, A, “ A question of torture: CIA
interrogation, from the cold war to the war on terror.” New York:
Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt, 2006, Page 207.
[4] Carlsmith, K. M., & Sood, A. M. , “
The fine line between interrogation and retribution. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology”, 45, 2009,
191–196.
[5] Leo, R. A. , Inside the interrogation
room. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 86, 1996, 266–303.
[6] Drizin, S. A., & Leo, R. A., The
problem of false confessions in the post-DNA world. North Carolina Law
Review, 82, 2004, 891–1007.
[7] Lifton, R. J., The Nazi doctors. Medical killing and the
psychology of genocide. New York: Basic Books. 1986.
[8] Blumenfeld, L., The tortured lives of interrogators: Veterans
of Iraq, N. Ireland and Mideast share stark memories. The Washington Post, June
4, 2007, A1.
[9]Mahmood Mamdani, “Making Sense of Political
Violence in Postcolonial Africa,” in Experiments with Truth: Transitional
Justice and the Processes of Truth and Reconciliation. Documenta 11, Platform
2, ed. Okwui Enwezor et. al. (Ostfildern-Ruit, Germany: Hatje Cantz
Publishers, 2002;
[10]
Rancière, Jacques., Who is the Subject of the Rights of Man?. In: South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 103 (2-3), 2004, Page 305.
[11]Luc Huyse, “Victims,” Reconciliation
After Violent Conflict: A Handbook, eds. David Bloomfield, Teresa Barnes
and Luc Huyse, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance,
2003, pp. 54-66, p. 63.
[12] Mahmood Mamdani, “Making Sense of
Political Violence in Postcolonial Africa,” in Experiments with Truth:
Transitional Justice and the Processes of Truth and Reconciliation. Documenta
11, Platform 2, ed. Okwui Enwezor et. al. (Ostfildern-Ruit, Germany: Hatje
Cantz Publishers, 2002.
[13] Rajmohan Gandhi, Reconciliation and the
American Dream: Pointers from Gandhi & King, Keynote talk at the
“Reconciliation in America” Symposium, John Hope Franklin Center, Hyatt Hotel,
Tulsa, May 31, 2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment